Liquid diet called Kool Aid.......
mind blown
JoinedPosts by mind blown
-
9
What PRODUCT do Jehovah's Witnesses peddle anyway???
by Terry inmadison avenue became famous for selling the sizzle rather than the steak.. the point of advertising was to create an appetite for a product.. sometimes, in order to create desire for the product, advertising consisted of imposing an embedded fear that could only.
be resolved by purchasing the solution: the product.. .
four hundred and twelve billion dollars annually is spent on advertsing in the u.s. ($412 billion).
-
-
-
53
The Stones are touring...........kinda
by dinah ini'm not paying more than our house payment for vince and i to see a show.
i will buy the video and watch it nekkid.. the last time i saw them was in 1994 at legion field with my best friend.
we still say after all these years it was one of the best nights of our lives.. .
-
-
mind blown
.......still love the Stones ...last time I saw them Keith Richard's did a ballad which was beautiful.......he still has it and is the most musical of the lot......
-
3
JW's must have gotten to him.... :/
by mind blown inhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gezockgkeyy.
~ every night my dreams the same.
men are coming to take me away.
-
-
mind blown
Me too.....
No I haven't......but I'm sure without questions.....AWESOME.....
-
3
JW's must have gotten to him.... :/
by mind blown inhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gezockgkeyy.
~ every night my dreams the same.
men are coming to take me away.
-
-
mind blown
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEZockGkEyY
~ Every night my dream’s the same
Same old city with a different name
Men are coming to take me away
I don’t know why but I know I can’t stay
There’s a weight that’s pressing down
Late at night you can hear the sound
Even the noise you make when you sleep
Can’t swim across a river so deep
They know my name 'cause I told it to them
But they don’t know where
They don’t know when it’s coming, when it’s coming
There’s this fear I keep so deep
Knew its name since before I could speak, yeah, oh
They know my name 'cause I told it to them
But they don’t know where
They don’t know when it’s coming
Oh when it’s coming, keep the car running
If some night I don’t come home
Please don’t think I’ve left you alone
The same place animals go when they die
You can’t climb across a mountain so high
The same city where I go when I sleep
You can’t swim across a river so deep
They know my name 'cause I told it to them
But they don’t know where
They don’t know when it’s coming
Oh when is it coming?
Keep the car running
Keep the car running, keep the car running
-
60
SADNESS
by compound complex inshe wraps me in her cold embrace,.
a hold that will not let go .
.. i welcome her with half a heart, .
-
-
mind blown
Beautiful
-
18
Lincoln
by glenster inlincoln's fight for the thirteenth amendment in the last four months.
of his life.. steven spielberg dir.. daniel day-lewis, sally field, david strathairn, joseph gordon-.
levitt, james spader, hal holbrook, tommy lee jones, jackie earle.
-
-
mind blown
I've been looking forward to see this....
-
65
It's Official! The Governing Body IS the Faithful and Discreet Slave (Annual Meeting Report - jw.org)
by 00DAD init's official!
from the jw.org website:.
november 9, 2012. annual meeting report .
-
-
mind blown
Thank you for posting
Still clinging to 1919, guess WTS is keeping the dates
-
98
Rick Simons' Opposition to WTS Motion in Conti case is brilliant--Check it out @ Alameda Sup Ct Website
by DNCall in -
-
mind blown
just clearing up a few things.......
-
98
Rick Simons' Opposition to WTS Motion in Conti case is brilliant--Check it out @ Alameda Sup Ct Website
by DNCall in -
-
mind blown
Basic Civil Appellate Practice in the Court
of Appeal for the Second District
Prepared by the Appellate Courts Committee of the Los Angeles County Bar Association
This pamphlet is not an official reference source, and you may not cite it as authority. You must
evaluate your own case and conduct your own research. Although this pamphlet provides some
legal authorities for your convenience, you are responsible for making sure that they apply to
your case and that they have not been superseded.
Neither the Court of Appeal nor the Los Angeles County Bar Association is allowed to provide you
with legal advice .
This Guide was prepared by members of the Appellate Courts Committee of the Los Angeles County Bar
Association.
It may be freely copied and distributed.
I. INTRODUCTION
II. AT THE OUTSET: SHOULD YOU CONSIDER SETTLEMENT?
III. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
A. The Second District of the Court of Appeal
B. The Limited Function of Appellate Review
C. Threshold Questions
IV. MECHANICS OF THE APPELLATE PROCESS
A. The Notice of Appeal
B. The Record on Appeal
C. The Civil Case Information Statement and the Certificate of Interested Entities or Persons
D. Briefing
1. The basic timetable
2. Extensions of time
3. Technical requirements
4. Common pitfalls
5. What if the Clerk rejects a document?
V. ORAL ARGUMENT AND DECISION
A. Scheduling
B. Preparing for Argument
C. Participating in Argument
D. Decision
VI. PETITIONS FOR REHEARING
A. Should You Seek Rehearing?
B. Deadlines
C. Considerations in Preparing the Petition and Answer
D. Ruling
http://www.calblogofappeal.com/2008/03/21/effective-oral-argument-preparation/
It’s been a while since I’ve posted any advice on oral argument, so I went Googling last night and turned up this gem from an old Howard Bashman weekly column at Law.com. It’s not so much about the argument per se as it is the preparation for oral argument, for good reason:
Appellate judges commonly report that oral argument changes their mind about the outcome of an appeal in only a small fraction of cases. However, I’ve always viewed that information as an invitation to become even more prepared to deliver an effective appellate oral argument.
Appellate judges may have a draft opinion prepared, and may rarely change their minds due to oral argument, but — according to at least one justice I’ve spoken to — sometimes they are actually looking for the appellate advocate to give them a reason to change their mind.
5 Comments -
98
Rick Simons' Opposition to WTS Motion in Conti case is brilliant--Check it out @ Alameda Sup Ct Website
by DNCall in -
-
mind blown
... told you guys this a long time ago.....though I'm not an atty......
The Appeals Process:
A litigant who files an appeal, known as an "appellant," must show that the trial court or administrative agency made a legal error that affected the decision in the case. The court of appeals makes its decision based on the record of the case established by the trial court or agency.It does not receive additional evidence or "hear witnesse". The court of appeals also may review the factual findings of the trial court or agency, but typically may only overturn a decision on factual grounds if the findings were "clearly erroneous."
The court of appeals decision usually will be the last word in a case,unless it sends the case back to the trial court for additional proceedings, or the parties ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case.
Appeals are decided by panels of three judges working together. The appellant presents legal arguments to the panel, in writing, in a document called a "brief." In the brief, the appellant tries to persuade the judges that the trial court made an error, and that its decision should be reversed. On the other hand, the party defending against the appeal, known as the "appellee," tries in its brief to show why the trial court decision was correct, or why any error made by the trial court was not significant enough to affect the outcome of the case.
Although some cases are decided on the basis of written briefs alone, " many" cases are selected for an "oral argument" before the court . Oral argument in the court of appeals is a structured discussion between the appellate lawyers and the panel of judges focusing on the legal principles in dispute. Each side is given a short time — usually about 15 minutes — to present arguments to the court.
The court of appeals decision usually will be the final word in the case, unless it sends the case back to the trial court for additional proceedings, or the parties ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case. In some cases the decision may be reviewed en banc, that is, by a larger group of judges (usually all) of the court of appeals for the circuit.
A litigant who loses in a federal court of appeals, or in the highest court of a state, may file a petition for a "writ of certiorari," which is a document asking the Supreme Court to review the case. The Supreme Court, however, does not have to grant review. The Court typically will agree to hear a case only when it involves an unusually important legal principle, or when two or more federal appellate courts have interpreted a law differently. There are also a small number of special circumstances in which the Supreme Court is required by law to hear an appeal. When the Supreme Court hears a case, the parties are required to file written briefs and the Court may hear oral argument.
144001 And after all that grief you gave Cedars for inaccurate information .........
"Oral arguments are allowed by a subtantial majority of California courts (some demand written arguments only - it's up to the judge to set the policy for his/her courtroom), and no special permission is needed for this. It's oral evidence that is generally not allowed unless the court gives special permission, as occurred here. In other words, it's ok for lawyers to argue the motion, but the court wants any substantive evidence that is presented by the lawyers to be in written form, not oral testimony.
The WTBTS claims that the witness will be a representative of the WTBTS q ualified to speak about the past and present history of Patterson, its appraised value, and the WTBTS' future plans for Patterson.
As for Simons, there would be no reason for him to introduce oral testimony. His argument is a legal one that does not require the introduction of any evidence whatsoever. He is simply arguing that the law does not allow the substitution that the WTBTS is requesting, or the reduction in the bond amount. Based on some very limited research I did on Simons claims, it appears that his argument is a good one.
Nevertheless, there's no need for anyone to be concerned about this issue. Even if the court grants the WTBTS' motion, Conti's judgment will be more than adequately collateralized. No matter how the court rules, Conti will not collect anything until she either settles with the WTBTS or the appeal and this case is resolved in one way or another, so this is not a huge issue for Conti, as it will neither help nor hinder her in collecting her judgment.
Edited to add: One more point, to clarify the situation, Simons will indeed be presenting oral argument in court tomorrow. But he will not be seeking to introduce any oral testimony by witnesses, as the argument he will be making does not require the introduction of any evidence at all."